[Mind's Eye] Re: Enlightenment

wow...:)

On Jul 12, 12:56 pm, Molly <mollyb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I don't agree with any of it.  But I will say that taking the path to
> awareness through the mental body is one of the most difficult paths.
> I wish you luck on it.
>
> Enlightenment is a state of awareness - a moment of awareness where
> one is fully realized?
>
> attained through concentration or substance - while both can point a
> direction, neither can provide a vehicle
>
> it is the mind that is aware - if you are witnessing, or "aware" of
> the contents of you mind, what part of you is that?  There is more
> than the mind in each and every one of us
>
> the mind is finite - not sure about that, in fact, I seriously doubt
> it
>
> whatever is aware is also finite - no again.  Although I can see how
> your linear logic gets you there.  Again, a mental exercise that comes
> up short
>
> God-state cannot be experience only understood - so I take it you have
> not had the experience, think you understand it, and assume it is the
> same for everyone
>
> my reason is...subject to my limitations - this, I agree with!
>
> On Jul 11, 2:12 pm, RP Singh <123...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > The state of enlightenment , or self-realization , is simply a state
> > of awareness like the dream -state or deep-sleep , and can be attained
> > through concentration or substance - use. It is the mind which is
> > aware and as the mind is finite , whatever it is aware of is also
> > finite. The very fact that the so-called transcendental state can be
> > experienced through use of entheogens casts a doubt about its
> > spiritual nature. A person experiences such a state and when he comes
> > out of it is just his ordinary self. God-state cannot be experienced
> > by any being as it is beyond experience and can only be understood. We
> > find it difficult to accept that we are mortal and hence believe in
> > re-incarnation etc.  The fact is that the " I " has nowhere to go on
> > the death of the organism , it is simply an attribute of life and is
> > no more on the death of the body , and  is thus just an " illusion " .
> > This is , of course , my reading of the matter and can be erroneous as
> > my reason is not infallible and is subject to my limitations.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -